Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

O'Connor retires!

Discussion in 'Legal' started by rick_reno, Jul 1, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. rick_reno

    rick_reno member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,027
    At last President Bush will get to appoint a justice.
     
  2. HonorsDaddy

    HonorsDaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2005
    Messages:
    329
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Not Rhenquist? Hmm...

    Funny thing is, Bush could have appointed as many SCOTUS justices as he wanted. Unless im mistaken, there is no minimum, or limit, on how many there should be. In fact, i seem to remember that FDR did something very much like that.


    BTW Rick - love your tag line...
     
  3. cracked butt

    cracked butt Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    6,986
    Location:
    SE Wisconsin
    Hooray!

    Message to republican Senators- grow a pair and use the NUCLEAR OPTION!

    Newt Gingrich would be a good replacement :evil:
     
  4. dolanp

    dolanp Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    944
    Location:
    Texas
    I wonder if Rehnquist will do it soon. I can't imagine him staying on another term with his poor health.

    What's a damn shame is none of those socialist justices are retiring. If conservative ones retire we end up the same or worse as before.
     
  5. Dave R

    Dave R Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,628
    Location:
    Idaho
    AMEN! Act like a Democrat, for once. As much as I dislike their platform, I admire their fight.
     
  6. Don Gwinn

    Don Gwinn Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,385
    Location:
    Virden, IL
    No, FDR TRIED to "pack the court." He failed, and it was probably the biggest debacle in any of his terms as POTUS.

    rick_reno, you are FAST! You beat the Chicago Tribune's email alert.

    Now comes the battle! Good thing, too. I think Ralph Neas might have snapped and turned to cannibalism if the waiting had gone on.
     
  7. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,056
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    Bush will, at best, get a moderate appointed to the SC.
     
  8. boofus

    boofus Guest

    Ron Paul for great justice. Move zig!
     
  9. roo_ster

    roo_ster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2003
    Messages:
    2,994
    Location:
    USA
    Janice Rogers Brown for SCOTUS! Thomas for Chief Justice!

    O'Connor is gone...
    Rhenquist is going...
    JP Stevens is 84-85-ish...

    I bet three SCOTUS appts will occur during GWB's second term.
     
  10. Al Norris

    Al Norris Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    570
    Location:
    Rupert, ID.
    I doubt that Rehnquist will retire... Until he absolutely has to.

    If you do a little research, you will find that most Justices that retire, enter into obscurity and early death. Rehnquist has nothing outside of the law. O'Conner has her ranch, grandkids and a career in some NGO (can't remember which).
     
  11. Don't Tread On Me

    Don't Tread On Me Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,213
    Location:
    FLORIDA
    Well, if Bush and the GOP grow a pair, they should nominate a conservative. Hopefully one that respects the 2A and the constitution.


    This isn't a major chance for us, but a possibel disaster. You see, O'Conner (at least to my recollection) wasn't that hostile to our principles. She is a moderate, that overall leans just barely to the right. So, we are trading a moderate for a potential conservative. Not a big net gain.


    However, if we get a 'Moderate' like SOUTER was suppose to be (what a disaster that was, what a sell out, what a sucker job) then we are in big trouble. Bushy Jr isn't his dad thank God.


    Still, this will tip the court on the issues where O'Conner has sided with the liberals. So it is a victory if a conservative can get in.


    Reinquist is probably next. But at best, that would be a conservative for a conservative trade. We have to wait for a liberal to step down. There are 2 getting up there in age. There is Ginsberg, but I believe she can last this term. But then there is Stevens who wanted out back in 2000 thinking Gore would win. He's held on till 2004, but Bush won again. He is the serious tip vote that has liberals panicing beyond belief. I bet he'll stay on just to save the liberals.
     
  12. Don Gwinn

    Don Gwinn Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,385
    Location:
    Virden, IL
    To be an absolute pollyanna, Rhenquist going means the departure, not just of a conservative, but of a law-and-order geek who doesn't seem to have any strong principles beyond a deep reverence for quiet order and people knowing their places. We could possibly improve on that.

    Reading The Brethren might change your view on the value of having a "conservative" like Rhenquist at the head of the court. I know it did mine.
     
  13. dolanp

    dolanp Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    944
    Location:
    Texas
    I think the old liberals on the court will bide their time until Democrats take control or they just die waiting.
     
  14. Vernal45

    Vernal45 member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Messages:
    729
    Location:
    USA, I travel alot.
    God, please not Gonzales.


    Judge Alex Kozinski would be a good start.
     
  15. tulsamal

    tulsamal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2003
    Messages:
    801
    Location:
    Vinita, OK
    Even if you think Rhenquist is the perfect conservative judge, replacing him with another conservative gets you one other important thing: several more decades! He can't serve forever and hopefully Bush will nominate youngish conservatives who can be on the court for 30-40 years!

    I know there are people here that don't like him but the current judge who I respect the most _intellectually_ is Scalia. He would be my dream Chief Justice. Threaten them with Thomas and then "compromise" with Scalia.

    Obviously I hope some of the recent "group of five" decides to retire as well. I agree that replacing those is where we can actually tip the court's opinions.

    Gregg
     
  16. Don't Tread On Me

    Don't Tread On Me Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,213
    Location:
    FLORIDA
    Scalia is a moron in comparison to Thomas. Thomas is by far the best justice. If we had 9 Thomas', we'd be back to the founders vision.


    Not to say Scalia is bad, he is way better than Reinquist, and he is 1000x better than the rest of the court. The spread is amazingly wide. Scalia tends to tow the Republican line, which has proven to not always be Constitutional.
     
  17. GT

    GT Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    353
    Location:
    CT
    I had heard the troll Ginsberg was sick and ready to go.

    G
     
  18. GunGoBoom

    GunGoBoom member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,645
    Ron Paul!!!!!!!!! (like that could happen). I would age 10 years in 10 minutes if I found out that A. Gonzales was nominated.

    That's exactly right. I'd rank them Thomas, O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia, and then the rest.
     
  19. RealGun

    RealGun Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,308
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    I would request resignations from the whole bunch, guilty by association or just plain "old". Thomas' view on the Ten Commandments displays was dumb, definitely disappointing and certainly with some religious bias. He lost major points with me on the issue of Church/State separation. The issue was much more clear than he allowed.

    What I think will happen is a number of retirements but some agreement that they wouldn't all announce at one time. The Senate would choke on processing a number of replacements in a short period, and the Court might be incomplete for some time waiting for replacements. Clearly 3-4 are ready to go and will likely do that one way or the other during Bush's term.

    The only way to restore some confidence in that Court is to have some real turnover. If Bush doesn't consult with the Senate in some bipartisan way, his motive to stack the Court will be quite clear and start a virtual war over abortion and religion in general. The Dems would return to power in a heart beat. Judge selection should be done right in the best sense of the word. Make the Constitution mean something.
     
  20. Vernal45

    Vernal45 member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Messages:
    729
    Location:
    USA, I travel alot.
    Just got a chuckle at all of this. One of our favorite Liberal Senators, Kennedy stated (I dont have the exact quote, so paraphrasing here), "that if Bush nominated a judge that would not uphold individual rights, the fight would be on."


    Kennedy, Protector of individual rights. :barf:
     
  21. BostonGeorge

    BostonGeorge Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Salem, NH
    He's the one that needs to retire already, the people in this damn state can't get enough of him.
     
  22. Silver Bullet

    Silver Bullet Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,335
    Location:
    Arizona
    "Big Dig"
     
  23. Mr. James

    Mr. James Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    469
    Location:
    NoVa, downwind of the miasmal swamp
    He meant "individual right," singular, that being the right of any woman, any where, for any reason, to abort her unborn child any time from zero to 40+ weeks.

    That is the sole "individual right" Kennedy upholds.
     
  24. mrtgbnkr

    mrtgbnkr Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Messages:
    265
    Location:
    Dayton, OH
    I actually read somewhere that someone mentioned that DeWine would be a 'good' choice because he could get confirmed by the Senate. Of course he could, all of his liberal buddies would fall all over themselves to put him on the bench....and it would be about as bad a thing for the court, for the 2A, and for the country as anything I could imagine. I know we need to get him out of the senate, but putting him on the USSC would be far worse.
     
  25. The Rabbi

    The Rabbi member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,535
    Location:
    TN
    Scalia is the intellectual horsepower on the court and the most brilliant jurist the court has seen in some time. Anyone who doesnt recognize that is just ill-informed. His colleagues are scared of him. I'd love to see Scalia as CJ.

    In the meantime, the word is Gonzales will get it. Talk about a blown opportunity. I think they should really give the libs kenipshins and nominate: BORK!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page